Key concepts in rapid reviews: an overview

• Published in: Journal of clinical epidemiology Vol. 175; p. 111518
• Main Authors: Devane, Declan, Hamel, Candyce, Gartlehner, Gerald, Nussbaumer-Streit, Barbara, Griebler, Ursula, Affengruber, Lisa, Saif-Ur-Rahman, KM, Garritty, Chantelle
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Elsevier Inc 01.11.2024; Elsevier Limited
• Subjects: Clinical decision making; Clinical medicine; Clinical practice guidelines; Cost analysis; COVID-19; Decision Making; Evidence synthesis; Evidence-Based Medicine - methods; Evidence-Based Medicine - standards; GRADE approach; Healthcare decision-making; Humans; Internal Medicine; Loneliness; Methodological trade-offs; Older people; Pandemics; Peer review; Rapid reviews; Reproducibility; Reproducibility of Results; Research Design - standards; Research methodology; Review Literature as Topic; Social isolation; Synthesis; Systematic review; Systematic Reviews as Topic - methods; Systematic Reviews as Topic - standards; Video teleconferencing; Rapid reviews; Systematic review; GRADE approach; Healthcare decision-making; Methodological trade-offs; Evidence synthesis
• ISSN: 0895-4356; 1878-5921; 1878-5921
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2024.111518

Rapid reviews have gained popularity as a pragmatic approach to synthesize evidence in a timely manner to inform decision-making in healthcare. This article provides an overview of the key concepts and methodological considerations in conducting rapid reviews, drawing from a series of recently published guidance papers by the Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group. We discuss the definition, characteristics, and potential applications of rapid reviews and the trade-offs between speed and rigor. We present a practical example of a rapid review and highlight the methodological considerations outlined in the updated Cochrane guidance, including recommendations for literature searching, study selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment, synthesis, and assessing the certainty of evidence. Rapid reviews can be a valuable tool for evidence-based decision-making, but it is essential to understand their limitations and adhere to methodological standards to ensure their validity and reliability. As the demand for rapid evidence synthesis continues to grow, further research is needed to refine and standardize the methods and reporting of rapid reviews.